Recommendation: Conditional approval subject to legal agreement

Proposal: Full application for the proposed erection of a building consisting of 1no. Self-storage facility (Use Class B8) and 2no. industrial units (Use Classes B1, B2 and B8) with associated hardstanding and soft landscaping, following demolition of existing Units 718 and 720 Millars Business Park.

Applicant: IPIF

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 93 to 128.

The Committee were advised that the Members’ Update included:

·           Correction that existing units 720-21 at Molly Millars Business park were proposed to be demolished;

·           Correction to paragraph 12 of the officer report, which should refer to a 10.5m ridge height and not a haunch height;

·           Revised plans relating to Condition 2;

·           Amended conditions 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 26.

Rob Hempsall, on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the application. Rob stated that the existing site was occupied by two industrial units comparable in size to the proposed new two units. Rob added that the existing units were in need of serious repair, and the new units would be a considerable improvement. Rob stated that a 4m wide landscaping strip would be provided at the frontage of the units to increase the number of trees on site. Rob added that the proposal complied with policy CP15 as it provided additional class B floor space in addition to providing economic growth. Rob stated that the proposals were set in an existing industrial estate, and would set a benchmark for the level of quality design expected within the area. Rob added that the proposals constituted were a sustainable development, including the provision of 70kw of photovoltaic array, LED intelligent lighting, and four electric vehicle charging points. Rob concluded by stating that the proposed development would amount to a regeneration of a gateway site to the industrial estate, providing direct job creation and enhanced landscaping and visual appearance, whilst conforming to parking standards and providing a 35% reduction in carbon emissions.

Angus Ross queried whether site usage would now be classified as class E. Justin Turvey, Operational Manager – Development Management, stated that as this application had been received prior to September it would be considered under the old classification structure, however going forward it would indeed be a class E usage.

Andrew Mickleburgh queried the separation distance with the adjacent care home facility, and sought clarification regarding the 24 hour storage facility’s parking arrangements. Baldeep Pulahi, case officer, stated that the separation distance between the proposed units and the care home facility was 6.7m at the narrowest point, and 12.1m at the widest point. The 24 hour facility was only for certain specific users, meaning any late trips would be infrequent. Justin Turvey commented that there were no special separation distance regulations related to care home facilities.

Simon Weeks queried why the Committee had to consider the old use class for this application, when the Committee had previously been advised that an application must conform to current policy standards. Justin Turvey clarified that current policy had to be applied to planning applications, however use classes were applied as at the time of the application being submitted.

Gary Cowan queried whether the levels of out of hour’s noise had been fully assessed. Baldeep Pulahi stated that a noise assessment had been submitted and the environmental health officer was satisfied that no adverse harm would be caused as a result of this application.

Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey proposed an informative, stating that the Committee anticipated that additional landscaping and additional tree planting would be carried out on the unit frontage. This was agreed by the Committee, and added to the list of informatives.

Malcolm Richards queried whether any windows were proposed to face the care home. Malcolm commented that he was pleased to see employment staying within the area. Baldeep Pulahi confirmed there were no windows proposed to face the care home within the submitted plans.

RESOLVED That application number 201345 be approved, subject to conditions and informatives as set out in agenda pages 94 to 104, revised condition 2 as set out in the Members’ Update, revised conditions 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 26 as set out in the Members’ Update, additional informative regarding Members expectations regarding landscaping and tree planting as agreed by the Committee, and subject to legal agreement.